Reverse.
-
George -
And here's another one.GeorgeComment
-
Reverse, # 2.GeorgeComment
-
Great pictures George and Robert! ThanksComment
-
Ok this is what,s been said about the cross.
1. It have the same backside as a floch reproduction
2. The backside looks dont look like it has a periodic manufactured backside.
3. The hinge and pin setup is wrong.
Sorry for my bad english
/BComment
-
who is this " expert" if I may ask???
This is a textbook mayer, and has got NOTHING to do with Floch.
Yes, the backplate is silver / silver-plated, like the floch ek's ( and every other ek1 I have seen so far ) but that's where the similarity ends.
I don't see anything wrong with his cross at all.
Maybe the "expert" should join the WAF and do a forum search, looks like he still has something to learn....
Best regards,
BenComment
-
Floch has a totally and easy to recognize setup.Originally posted by Berra View Post
Setup and back is correct, and one of the most encountered variations, for this maker!
I have 3 of these exactly the same Mayer variant, 2 of them came with a medal and document group from the family of the recipient.
The only difference is that those are marked with "26".
This is a Good Mayer to me, I don't have the slightest doubts.
Are you sure that the buyer doesn't try to get some reduction and keep the EK1?
That happend to me already a couple of times before.
Comment
-
George and I have both posted originals for you to compare yours to. Surely you must agree that they match to the letter. Tell this 'expert' he is full of 'crappola', and this cross is an original. Here you also have two real experts giving you their opinions, which would be all that one should need, along with the photo proof.
Robert
Comment
-
Hi I realy trust you guys and are greatfull for all the help with pictures and all. I never doubted this cross myself.
One of the experts is www.military-antiques-stockholm.com the other two are informed about this thread but I'll let them awnser themself. I think that they are already members.
I dont think the buyer are trying to get somthing back on the price and I will meet with him in person later today. But I understand his concerns when you get that info from a expert.
I'll take it back and re-sell it.
Thank you /BLast edited by Berra; 09-15-2008, 12:58 PM.Comment
-
Well, that surprises me.
I didn't expect Peter v. Lucacks to make such remarks about a very nice original...
Regards,
BenComment
-
Hi!Originally posted by Berra View Post
I took a hasty look at the cross at Military Antiques when it was showed there, and I was the one to remark on the hinge and pin, I got the the feeling that the needle was to wide for an original, but I was wrong, sorry about that. I got it mixed up with something else................again sorry about that.
I clearly see that this is an original cross and I see myself "educated" about it, you live and you learn .
But I would like to note that I am by far no expert on Iron Crosses! And my opinion was no expert opinion. We didn´t try to write I fake authentication on or so.....
Comment
-
It takes a big man to say, "I was wrong." You have my deepest respect.
Robert
Comment
-
I completely agreeOriginally posted by robert pierce View PostIt takes a big man to say, "I was wrong." You have my deepest respect.
Robert
We all make learn in time and we all still make mistakes!Comment
-
I second that!!Originally posted by LuckyLuudje View PostI completely agree
We all make learn in time and we all still make mistakes!Comment
-
The cross is back in my posession and I am very greatfull for all the input in this matter.
I can now resell it without any doubt about its originality.
Thats the only reason I started this thread.
Thank you allComment
Comment